This Act builds around several core legal concepts: strategic prospectivity zones, Crown land status protections, parliamentary approval as a control device, specific exemptions and referral processes, and statutory remedies for exploration and mining tenure holders.

• Strategic prospectivity zones: s 6(1) defines the zones by reference to Schedule 1 and Plan No. 5132 in the Central Plan Register. The schedule and plan are the primary instruments identifying the geography to which the Act applies. The Act expressly notes that the map is illustrative only (s 6(2)), which signals a potential difference between the schedule descriptions and the graphic depiction.

• Crown land restrictions: s 7(2) provides that after commencement it is not lawful for Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone to be sold or have its status changed unless both Houses approve by resolution. The Act binds the Crown (s 5), so the restriction applies to State action.

• Parliamentary approval mechanism: the Act defines “parliamentary approval” in s 8. A draft resolution is deemed approved if either the House expressly approves it, or 5 sitting days pass without a notice of motion to disapprove, or any such notice is withdrawn or negatived. This design provides for both affirmative and passive methods of approval.

• Exemptions and administrative discretion: s 7 contains many carve-outs. For land less than 500 hectares, s 7(4) provides that land is exempt from s 7 unless the Director of Mines is of the opinion that effective and efficient mining operations may be carried out on the land. Several classes of land are explicitly exempt if they meet tests in s 7(5), including land in permanent timber production zones not subject to certain MRDA orders, land forming part of national parks or reserves under the Nature Conservation Act 2002, specified towns in Schedule 3 (s 7(5)(c)), and land subject to occupation rights under particular Acts that do not limit the operation of the MRDA (s 7(5)(d)-(e)). s 7(6) allows for an exemption where a lease or licence has been granted under the MRDA and then matters of threatened species, heritage, Aboriginal significance, or broader special value are discovered and a referral to the Tasmanian Planning Commission results in a recommendation for change of use that is proclaimed.

• Remedies for affected tenement holders: s 9 and s 10 create reimbursement and compensation rights. s 9(1) entitles a holder of a licence under the MRDA to be reimbursed reasonable costs of work conducted where the licence authorised exploration on Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone and the land’s use is changed under State law resulting in revocation. s 9(2) makes the amount payable within 3 months and, if not paid, recoverable as a debt due by the Crown. s 10(1) entitles holders of leases under the MRDA to reimbursement for reasonable loss or damage where mining operations are frustrated by a change in land use that leads to revocation. If the Minister and the lessee cannot agree, the Mining Tribunal determines the amount (s 10(2)). s 10(3)-(5) give the Minister power, where part of a tenement can be severed without undue interference, to grant a new lease or to resurvey/define claims and to include rights to mine at prescribed depth below the surface; the Minister must communicate proposed exercises of these powers and the lessee may apply to the Mining Tribunal (s 10(4)-(5)). Part 7 of the MRDA applies to compensation claims under s 10 (s 11).

• Administrative instruments and rule-making: the Governor may make regulations for the Act (s 12). The Governor may also amend Schedule 3 by Gazette order (s 7(9)), and that order is not a statutory rule within the Rules Publication Act 1953 (s 7(10)). Until an Administrative Arrangements Act order reallocates responsibility, the Minister for State Development and Resources administers the Act and the Department of State Development and Resources is the responsible department (s 13).

• Cross-Act definitions and precedence: s 3 imports expressions used in the Act from the MRDA 1995 unless the contrary intention appears. s 7(3) expressly provides that s 7(2) has effect notwithstanding the Crown Lands Act 1976, indicating parliamentary intent to give these restrictions primacy in those circumstances.

These concepts combine a spatially targeted tenure-protection regime with discrete remedial entitlements for tenure holders displaced by subsequent State law changes of use. The legal architecture depends on cross-referencing other land, forestry and conservation statutes and on administrative processes that include Ministerial decisions, Director of Mines opinions, Tasmanian Planning Commission referrals and parliamentary resolutions.

The Act affects several identifiable groups by name or by implication in the statute. The impact and the decision-making powers are allocated among the State (the Crown), Ministers and agencies, tenure holders under the MRDA, and those seeking Crown land transactions in the zones.

• The Crown and State agencies: the Act binds the Crown (s 5). The Crown is the party restricted from selling or changing status of Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone without parliamentary approval (s 7(2)). The Crown is also the entity that must make payments for reimbursements or compensation under s 9 and s 10; s 9(2) makes amounts recoverable as a debt due by the Crown.

• Ministers and executive decision-makers: the Minister administering the MRDA and the Minister administering the Constitution Act are given roles regarding referrals to the Tasmanian Planning Commission where environmental, heritage or Aboriginal significance concerns are discovered after a mining lease or licence has been granted (s 7(6)(c)). The Minister has powers to offer alternative tenements, resurvey claims, and include rights to work at prescribed depths below changed land under s 10(3). The Director of Mines has express discretionary influence for small parcels: s 7(4) makes land under 500 hectares exempt from s 7 unless the Director of Mines considers that effective and efficient mining operations may be carried out on the land.

• Holders of licences and leases under the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995: the Act expressly confers reimbursement rights on holders of licences that authorised exploration on Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone where the land’s use changes under State law resulting in revocation (s 9(1)). It also entitles lessees to be reimbursed for reasonable loss or damage where a lease authorises mining operations on Crown land in a zone and revocation occurs because of a change in land use (s 10(1)). Lessees are given procedural protections: the Minister must communicate proposals under s 10(3) and the lessee may apply to the Mining Tribunal if dissatisfied (s 10(4)-(5)). In default of agreement, compensation is determined by the Mining Tribunal (s 10(2)). Part 7 of the MRDA applies to compensation claims under s 10 (s 11).

• Prospective purchasers and users of Crown land inside the zones: s 7(2) constrains sales and status changes. Developers, buyers and any party interested in acquiring Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone are affected because any sale or change of status requires parliamentary approval, except where an exemption applies (s 7(4)-(8)). Schedule 3 lists towns exempt from s 7, which alters the practical footprint of the restriction.

• The Tasmanian Planning Commission: invoked by s 7(6) for references made under the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991. The Commission’s recommendations, if resulting in proclamation by the Governor, create an exemption from the operation of s 7 for the land in question (s 7(6)(d)).

• Parliamentary Houses and the Governor: both Houses must pass resolutions approving sales or status changes (s 7(2)); the Act defines how a House is to be taken to have approved a draft resolution (s 8). The Governor makes regulations (s 12) and may amend Schedule 3 by Gazette order (s 7(9)), and those Gazette orders are not statutory rules under the Rules Publication Act 1953 (s 7(10)).

• Departments and officials responsible for administration: until reallocated under the Administrative Arrangements Act 1990, the Minister for State Development and Resources and the Department of State Development and Resources administer the Act (s 13).

In short, the Act imposes constraints and creates entitlements that principally affect the State and its land-management processes, licence and lease holders under the MRDA, and prospective purchasers or other users of Crown land within the designated zones. Decision-making is concentrated among Ministers, the Director of Mines, the Tasmanian Planning Commission (in referrals), Parliament (for approvals), the Mining Tribunal (for compensation disputes), and the Governor (regulations and Schedule 3 amendments).

The Act allocates a set of duties, prohibitions and rights. The most operational duties and rights are listed below with statutory references.

Duties/Prohibitions

• Prohibition on sale or change of status of Crown land in zones unless parliamentary approval is obtained (s 7(2)). This is a duty on the Crown and the agencies acting for or on behalf of the State: the Act binds the Crown (s 5).

• The Minister must communicate particulars to a lessee of the manner in which the Minister proposes to exercise the powers in s 10(3) before doing so (s 10(4)). This imposes a procedural obligation on the Minister to notify affected lessees.

• The Governor may make regulations for the purposes of the Act (s 12), which creates an administrative duty on the executive to set out finer detail if and when regulations are made.

Rights

• Holders of exploration licences under the MRDA may be reimbursed the reasonable cost of any work conducted under the licence where the licence authorised exploration on Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone and the land’s use is changed under State law resulting in revocation (s 9(1)).

• Where reimbursement is due under s 9(1), it must be paid within 3 months and if not so paid is recoverable as a debt due by the Crown (s 9(2)). That creates a statutory right to payment enforceable in court.

• Holders of mining leases under the MRDA may be reimbursed for reasonable loss or reasonable damage if their lease authorised mining operations on Crown land in a strategic prospectivity zone and the land’s use is changed under State law resulting in revocation (s 10(1)). If the Minister and lessee cannot agree, the amount of compensation is to be determined by the Mining Tribunal (s 10(2)).

• Where a portion of a tenement can be severed, the Minister may grant a new lease or resurvey/define remaining parts and include rights to work and mine at prescribed depths beneath land whose surface status has changed (s 10(3)(a)-(c)). This gives lessees a potential right to replacement tenure or subsurface rights.

• Lessees dissatisfied with Ministerial proposals under s 10(3) may apply to the Mining Tribunal on a claim for compensation (s 10(4)). On hearing, the Tribunal may order the lessee to accept the Minister’s proposal either in its entirety or subject to variation or may find that the lessee is not required to accept the proposal and determine compensation for losses beyond the value of any replacement rights (s 10(5)).

• Part 7 of the MRDA applies to compensation claims under s 10 (s 11), which imports the statutory dispute-resolution framework and applicable procedures from that Act for these claims.

Administrative discretions and definitions

• The Director of Mines has an opinion-based discretion in relation to small parcels under 500 hectares: s 7(4) exempts land under 500 hectares from s 7 unless the Director of Mines opines that effective and efficient mining operations may be carried out on the land. That places decision-making discretion with an administrative officer for a significant exemption.

• The Act defines the territorial scope by reference to Schedule 1 and the Central Plan Register (s 6(1)); the map in Schedule 2 is illustrative only (s 6(2)). Determining whether a particular parcel falls within a zone requires reference to the schedule and Plan No. 5132.

Remedial enforcement and dispute resolution

• Payment obligations of the Crown under s 9 are enforceable as debts in any court of competent jurisdiction if not paid within 3 months (s 9(2)). Compensation disputes are to be determined by the Mining Tribunal in the absence of agreement (s 10(2)), and Part 7 of the MRDA governs compensation claims (s 11). These provisions create specific enforcement mechanisms rather than general criminal sanctions.

Taken together, the Act creates a statutory bar on disposal or status change of Crown land within the zones without parliamentary approval, while conferring financial protections and procedural rights to affected MRDA tenure holders, and conferring several administrative discretions on the Director of Mines and the Minister.

This Act does not create criminal offences or explicit civil penalties within its text for non-compliance with the restriction on sale or change of status beyond the statutory prohibition itself. Enforcement and remedies in the Act focus on monetary recovery and tribunal determination rather than punitive sanctions.

Enforcement mechanisms and remedies explicitly present in the text

• Recovery of amounts due by the Crown: s 9(2) requires that an amount reimbursable to the holder of a licence be paid within three months and, if not paid, it is recoverable as a debt due by the Crown to the holder in any court of competent jurisdiction. The remedy is therefore a straightforward debt claim against the Crown in the courts.

• Compensation and tribunal determination: s 10(2) provides that in default of agreement between the Minister and the lessee the amount of compensation is to be determined by the Mining Tribunal. s 10(5) sets out the Tribunal’s powers on hearing a claim: the Tribunal can require the lessee to accept the Minister’s proposal either in whole or subject to variation, or order that the lessee is not required to accept the proposal and determine compensation for losses beyond the value of any rights the lessee might acquire under the proposal. s 11 makes Part 7 of the MRDA applicable to compensation claims.

• Administrative avenues before compensation is sought: s 10(4) imposes a duty on the Minister to communicate particulars of the proposed exercise of powers under s 10(3) to the lessee, and the lessee has the right to apply to the Mining Tribunal if dissatisfied. This provides a procedural step before tribunal proceedings.

Notable absences

• No express offences: the Act contains no express indictable or summary offences, no schedule of pecuniary penalties or infringement notices, and no enforcement powers such as warrants, seizure or injunctive relief contained in the text. Compliance with the prohibition in s 7(2) would be enforced through administrative control (the Crown itself must not lawfully act contrary to s 7(2)), and any dispute about reimbursement or compensation is remedial rather than punitive.

• No administrative penalty regime: the Act does not create fines or administrative penalties for breaches by private parties or officers. The principal sanction for non-payment of reimbursement is the civil remedy of a debt claim against the Crown (s 9(2)).

Other enforcement touchpoints

• The Mining Tribunal is the central dispute-resolution forum for compensation questions under s 10 and for determination of compensation amounts where agreement fails (s 10(2)-(5); s 11). Legal practitioners and lessees should therefore expect compensation disputes to be channelled to that specialised tribunal.

• Where a party seeks to pursue a reimbursement due under s 9(2), that party may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction to recover the debt due by the Crown. The Act does not specify a special procedure for such claims beyond ordinary debt recovery.

• The Governor’s power to make regulations (s 12) could, if regulations are made, provide further enforcement mechanisms or requirements, but none are contained in the Act itself.

In practice, persons affected by revocation of licences or leases will enforce their monetary entitlements through tribunal proceedings (Mining Tribunal) or ordinary court proceedings for debt recovery. The Act’s focus is on compensatory remedies and administrative resolution rather than criminal sanction.

The Act extensively cross-references and interacts with several Tasmanian statutes. It imports definitions, creates exceptions that depend on other Acts, and directs certain processes to bodies established by other legislation. The interaction points materially affect how the Act operates on the ground.

Key statutory cross-references

• Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 (MRDA): s 3 provides that expressions used in the Act have the same meaning as in the MRDA unless the contrary intention appears. The Act expressly refers to licences and leases under the MRDA (ss 9-11) and applies Part 7 of the MRDA to compensation claims under s 10 (s 11). The MRDA therefore supplies definitional content, the framework for tenure, and procedural and substantive components for compensation claims.

• Crown Lands Act 1976: s 7(3) expressly states that s 7(2) has effect notwithstanding the Crown Lands Act 1976. Sections 7(4) and 7(5) also reference sales and changes of status under the Crown Lands Act. That wording signals an intention that the SPZ protections take precedence over ordinary Crown Lands Act mechanisms unless an exemption or parliamentary approval operates.

• Forest Management Act 2013: s 7(4)(b), s 7(5)(a) and s 7(5)(d) reference the Forest Management Act 2013, including permanent timber production zone land and sales by the Forestry corporation. The Act’s exemptions hinge on whether occupation rights or status changes under the Forest Management Act limit the operation of the MRDA.

• Nature Conservation Act 2002 and National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002: s 7(4)(ca) and s 7(4)(cb) reference changes of class or occupation rights under these Acts that would limit the operation of the MRDA and thereby trigger exemptions. s 7(5)(b) lists land forming part of State reserves, national parks, nature reserves, historic sites or game reserves under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 as exempt if they satisfy the conditions. These cross-references mean that determinations under conservation and parks legislation materially affect whether the SPZ restrictions apply.

• Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 and Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997: s 7(6) contemplates referrals to the Tasmanian Planning Commission in accordance with Part 2 of the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991 on the joint instruction of two Ministers. The Commission’s recommendation for change of use, if proclaimed by the Governor, exempts the land from the operation of s 7 (s 7(6)(d)). This aligns planning commission referral processes with SPZ exemptions.

• Rules Publication Act 1953: s 7(10) provides that orders under s 7(9) (Governor’s amendment of Schedule 3 by Gazette order) are not statutory rules within the meaning of the Rules Publication Act 1953. That reduces the procedural requirements or parliamentary scrutiny that typically attend statutory rules.

Direct effects of cross-references

• Priority and interaction: s 7(3) stating that s 7(2) operates notwithstanding the Crown Lands Act 1976 indicates a direct legislative override. Practitioners must treat the SPZ statutory prohibition as independent and superior to Crown Lands Act procedures where there is tension, unless one of the Act’s exemptions applies.

• Exemptions depend on other Acts: many of the exemptions created by s 7 are conditional on outcomes under other statutes. For example, whether land in a permanent timber production zone is exempt depends on the presence or absence of an MRDA order (s 7(5)(a)). Whether a small parcel is exempt depends on the Director of Mines’ opinion, a decision informed by mining viability (s 7(4)). Whether land forming part of a national park is exempt depends on classification under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 (s 7(5)(b), s 7(4)(ca)).

• Procedural referrals and proclamations: s 7(6) links the MRDA, the Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991, the Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997, and the Constitution Act 1934 by permitting Ministerial instruction to the Planning Commission and allowing a Governor’s proclamation to effect an exemption. This chain involves multiple statutes and decision-makers.

• Dispute resolution and remedies: the application of Part 7 of the MRDA to compensation claims under s 10 (s 11) embeds MRDA dispute-resolution processes and procedures in claims arising under this Act. Likewise, interactions with the Mining Tribunal reflect integrated dispute-resolution arrangements across mineral tenure statutes.

Practical implication of cross-Act complexity

• Legal advisers must consult multiple Acts to determine whether a Crown land sale or change of status in an SPZ is permissible, and whether a given parcel is exempt. Determination requires checking the MRDA, Crown Lands Act 1976, Forest Management Act 2013, Nature Conservation Act 2002, National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002, Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991, and possibly the Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997.

• Administrative decision-making is multi-layered: Ministers, Director of Mines, the Planning Commission, the Governor (for proclamations and regulations), and Parliament all have roles that interact across statutes.

• Parliamentary and executive oversight: the Act requires parliamentary approval for sales or status changes (s 7(2)) and also provides that the Governor may amend Schedule 3 by Gazette order, for which the statutory rule procedures under the Rules Publication Act do not apply (s 7(9)-(10)). That creates differing levels of parliamentary scrutiny depending on the device used.

In sum, the Act is designed to operate in concert with existing land, forestry and mineral legislation, but it creates a specific overlay of restrictions and remedial provisions that must be read alongside those other statutes to determine the full legal position for any parcel of land within the strategic prospectivity zones.

The Act as presented includes editorial notes indicating several amendments to particular sections and schedules. The Act text itself contains parenthetical amendment notes, providing the amendment instrument, number and date applied. The amendment history visible in the text is as follows.

• Section 3: Amended by No. 38 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 27 November 2002. The amendment imports MRDA definitions into the Act (s 3).

• Section 4 (Objects): Amended by No. 38 of 2002, s 4, applied 27 November 2002.

• Section 6: Subsection (1) amended by No. 38 of 2002, s 5, applied 27 November 2002. Subsection (2) indicates the map is illustrative.

• Section 7: Multiple amendments recorded.

  • Subsection (2) amended by No. 38 of 2002, s 6, applied 27 November 2002.
  • Subsection (4) amended by No. 50 of 2013, Schedule 1, applied 11 December 2013; No. 38 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 27 November 2002; and No. 64 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 31 December 2002 (the text shows multiple amendment notes to the same subsection).
  • Subsection (5) amended by No. 38 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 27 November 2002; No. 55 of 2000, Schedule 1, applied 14 July 2000; No. 64 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 31 December 2002; and No. 50 of 2013, Schedule 1, applied 11 December 2013.
  • Subsection (6) amended by No. 85 of 1997, Schedule 4, applied 1 January 1998; No. 38 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 27 November 2002; and No. 28 of 2009, s 40, applied 1 September 2009.
  • Subsection (7) contains a history including amendments by No. 28 of 2009, s 40 and No. 85 of 1997, Schedule 4, applied 1 January 1998, but a note indicates subsection (7) was omitted by No. 50 of 2013, Schedule 1, applied 11 December 2013.
  • Subsection (8) amended by No. 50 of 2013, Schedule 1, applied 11 December 2013, and No. 64 of 2002, Schedule 1, applied 31 December 2002.
  • Subsection (9) and (10) relating to Governor’s orders and rule status appear in the Act text without separate amendment notes.

• Section 8: No amendment note recorded in the displayed text.

• Section 9: Subsection (1) substituted by No. 38 of 2002, s 7, applied 27 November 2002; s 9(2) appears without separate amendment note.

• Section 10: Subsection (1) substituted by No. 38 of 2002, s 8, applied 27 November 2002. Subsections (2)-(5) also bear amendment notes indicating amendments by No. 38 of 2002, s 8.

• Section 11: Substituted by No. 38 of 2002, s 9, applied 27 November 2002.

• Section 12: No amendment note recorded in the displayed text.

• Section 13: No amendment note recorded with the displayed text, but the section reflects an interim administrative arrangement.

• Schedule 1: Amended by No. 38 of 2002, s 10, applied 27 November 2002. The Schedule contains graphic images and a note that the schedule was amended by No. 38 of 2002.

• Schedule 2: Substituted by No. 38 of 2002, s 11, applied 27 November 2002.

• Schedule 3: Included in the Act and s 7(9) provides the Governor power to amend Schedule 3; no separate amendment notes provided in the displayed text.

Amendment instruments named in the footnotes include:

• Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 amendments were referenced, but the specific instrument amending this Act is No. 38 of 2002 for multiple sections.
• No. 85 of 1997, No. 55 of 2000, No. 64 of 2002, No. 28 of 2009, No. 50 of 2013 appear as amending Acts in the margin notes for particular subsections.

What the amendment notes show about the Act

• A substantial consolidation or reworking occurred around 2002 with No. 38 of 2002 amending many sections (s 3, s 4, s 6, s 7, s 9, s 10, s 11, Schedule 1 and 2). Those 2002 amendments appear to have modernised definitions, the compensation scheme and the mapping schedules.

• Later amendments in 2009 and 2013 adjusted exemptions and some subsection content, for example the omission of a subsection by No. 50 of 2013 applied 11 December 2013, and changes in the interplay with the Forest Management Act 2013.

• The Act has had a series of surgical amendments rather than wholesale replacement after 2002, with attention paid to the exemptions (s 7) and the compensation mechanisms (s 9-10).

For precise drafting history and the text that changed in each amending Act, practitioners should consult the amending instruments listed in the footnotes (for example No. 38 of 2002, No. 28 of 2009, No. 50 of 2013) and the consolidated Act as in force on the relevant dates. The Act’s internal amendment notes identify when components of the present text were substituted or amended and provide the schedule and section numbers of the amending legislation.

The Act itself contains no record of judicial decisions, and it does not name any cases. The statutory text does, however, allocate dispute-resolution forums and indicates how and where litigation or tribunal proceedings relating to this Act would be heard. The following points are extractable from the text.

• Mining Tribunal jurisdiction for compensation disputes: s 10(2) states that in default of agreement between the Minister and the lessee, the amount of compensation is to be determined by the Mining Tribunal. s 10(5) further sets out the Tribunal’s powers in resolving disputes about proposals and compensation. Section 11 imports Part 7 of the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 to apply to claims for compensation under s 10, thereby importing the MRDA’s procedural regime and rules applicable to the Mining Tribunal and related appeal paths. Therefore any litigation history relevant to s 10 claims will be found in cases brought under Part 7 of the MRDA and decisions of the Mining Tribunal or appellate courts interpreting that Part.

• Court jurisdiction for debt recovery: s 9(2) provides that reimbursable amounts unpaid within three months are recoverable as a debt due by the Crown to the licence holder in any court of competent jurisdiction. Thus, licence holders who seek to enforce s 9 recoveries would bring ordinary civil actions for debts against the Crown in the Supreme Court (or other appropriate court) of Tasmania. Any litigation history in that respect would appear in ordinary civil causes lists and reported decisions where such debts were enforced.

• No cases named in the Act: the text contains no examples of litigation, no citations to judicial decisions, and no preamble identifying judicial interpretation. Consequently, anyone seeking precedent-based guidance on interpretation of this Act should look to decisions under the MRDA (Part 7) and to cases concerning the interaction of Crown land disposal restrictions and compensation for revocation of tenure, rather than to this Act for an internal litigation history.

• Practical expectation: disputes will typically follow two paths depending on the remedy sought. Compensation disputes involving leases will proceed to the Mining Tribunal under the MRDA framework (ss 10, 11). Disputes about unpaid reimbursements under s 9 will be litigated as debt claims in any court of competent jurisdiction (s 9(2)). Disputes about whether land is an SPZ or whether an exemption applies will require administrative review or judicial review of Ministerial or agency decisions under the relevant land, forestry or nature conservation statutes referenced in s 7.

Because the Act channels compensation disputes to the Mining Tribunal and debt recovery to ordinary courts, the litigation record concerning practical application of the Act will be found in tribunal determinations applying Part 7 of the MRDA and in court decisions enforcing Crown debts. The Act itself does not catalogue or name any judicial authorities.

Practitioners should note particular drafting features and operational frictions that can produce unexpected outcomes.

• Map is illustrative only: s 6(2) expressly says that strategic prospectivity zones are shown for illustration only on the map in Schedule 2. Reliance on the graphic depiction without reference to the Schedule 1 descriptions and Plan No. 5132 in the Central Plan Register risks misidentifying the precise legal extent of a zone. Always confirm with the Central Plan Register (Plan No. 5132) and Schedule 1 text.

• s 7(2) applies notwithstanding the Crown Lands Act 1976: s 7(3) states that s 7(2) has effect notwithstanding the Crown Lands Act 1976. This means that normal Crown Lands Act disposal or status-change procedures may not be sufficient if the land is within an SPZ. Do not assume Crown Lands Act processes will permit a sale absent parliamentary approval or a listed exemption.

• Small parcels exemption depends on Director of Mines opinion: s 7(4) makes all Crown land less than 500 hectares exempt from s 7 unless the Director of Mines opines that effective and efficient mining operations may be carried out on the land. That creates a decision point that can convert an apparent exemption into coverage depending on administrative discretion. The timing and basis of the Director of Mines’ opinion are not prescribed in the Act, so administrative practice and potential judicial review issues may arise.

• Interlocking exemptions and cross-Act dependency: many exemptions depend on whether changes under the Crown Lands Act, Forest Management Act, Nature Conservation Act or National Parks Act would “limit the operation” of the MRDA (s 7(4)(c), (ca), (cb), and s 7(5)). Determining whether a change limits the operation of the MRDA requires careful statutory cross-reading and possibly technical legal and factual analysis about how competing statutory regimes interact.

• Tasmanian Planning Commission referral pathway: s 7(6) provides a path where, after a tenement has been granted and subsequent environmental, heritage or Aboriginal-significance issues are discovered, a joint Ministerial instruction to the Planning Commission and a Commission recommendation for change of use followed by Governor’s proclamation will exempt land from s 7. That procedure is multi-step and relies on proclamation; it also potentially removes MRDA operation over the land once implemented. Practitioners should track whether a referral and proclamation have occurred, as this changes the status of the land.

• Schedule 3 amendments by Gazette order are not statutory rules: s 7(9)-(10) let the Governor amend Schedule 3 by Gazette order and state such orders are not statutory rules under the Rules Publication Act 1953. This reduces formal parliamentary or standing committee scrutiny of such amendments and makes monitoring the Gazette critical for affected parties. Changes to Schedule 3 can materially change which towns are exempt from s 7, altering the Act’s practical footprint.

• Parliamentary approval can occur by inaction: s 8(b) and (c) allow a draft resolution to be taken as approved if five sitting days elapse without notice of motion to disapprove, or if a notice is withdrawn or negatived. This means a sale or status-change resolution may be taken as approved by default if opponents fail to act within the time-window. Parties relying on Parliament not approving a resolution should not assume that absence of explicit approval equates to rejection.

• Practical limits on compensation and reimbursement: s 9 and s 10 use terms like “reasonable cost” and “reasonable loss or reasonable damage”. These standards require documentation and evidentiary proof to succeed before a court or the Mining Tribunal. The timing of claims, the calculation of amounts, and the evidentiary burden make good record-keeping essential. If payment is not made under s 9(2) within three months, the holder must commence recovery as a debt claim against the Crown; delay can allow the Crown to resist on procedural grounds.

• Minister’s power to offer alternative tenure and Tribunal’s power to order acceptance: s 10(3) empowers the Minister to grant new tenements or include subsurface rights, but s 10(5) allows the Mining Tribunal to require a lessee to accept the Minister’s proposal. This means a Tribunal can limit a lessee’s bargaining position by requiring acceptance of a Ministerial proposal in whole or with variation, with compensation as the net balance. Lessees should therefore engage early in negotiations and preserve rights to Tribunal review.

• Administrative responsibility can change: s 13 places administration with the Minister for State Development and Resources until an Administrative Arrangements Act order reallocates responsibility. That means historical administration may shift; practitioners must confirm which Minister and department currently administer the Act.

• Schedule 1/2 imagery and format: Schedule 1 contains a series of graphic images and the heading “Form Form” which suggests that the Schedule’s format is non-textual and may require reference to the Central Plan Register or agency mapping systems to interpret geographically. Do not rely solely on the PDF or scanned images for land boundary determination.

These “gotchas” all arise from the text of the Act and its deliberate cross-references, decision nodes and procedural devices. Parties should avoid relying on simple assumptions about land status or approval pathways without checking the central plan register, Gazette, Ministerial communications, Director of Mines opinions, and whether a Tasmanian Planning Commission referral/proclamation has occurred.

Compliance under this Act divides into three main practical tasks: (1) establishing whether the land in issue is within a strategic prospectivity zone and whether it is Crown land, (2) determining whether any exemption applies or whether parliamentary approval is required, and (3) for licence and lease holders, safeguarding entitlements and preparing for reimbursement/compensation procedures if revocation occurs. The following steps translate the Act’s mechanics into a compliance checklist.

1. Confirm SPZ status and authoritative mapping.

   • Consult Schedule 1, Plan No. 5132 in the Central Plan Register and the authoritative land records to determine whether a parcel is within a strategic prospectivity zone (s 6(1)). Do not rely solely on the graphic in Schedule 2, which the Act states is for illustration only (s 6(2)).

2. Confirm whether the land is Crown land and its current status.

   • Use land registry and Crown land records to verify Crown ownership and any existing occupation rights or tenures. The Act’s restrictions in s 7 apply to Crown land, defined by reference to the Crown Lands Act 1976 (s 7(1)).

3. If you propose to sell or change the status of Crown land in a SPZ:

   • Determine whether an exemption in s 7 applies. Key exemptions to check include:
     • Is the land less than 500 hectares and has the Director of Mines been or likely to be of the view that effective and efficient mining operations cannot be carried out (s 7(4))?
     • Is the land subject to sale or occupation rights under the Crown Lands Act 1976, Forest Management Act 2013, or National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002 in a way that does not limit the operation of the MRDA (s 7(4)(b), (4)(cb), (5)(d))?
     • Is the land part of a reserve, national park, nature reserve, historic site or game reserve under the Nature Conservation Act 2002 or otherwise listed in s 7(5)(b)?
     • Is the land located in a town listed in Schedule 3 (s 7(5)(c))? Monitor the Gazette for orders amending Schedule 3 under s 7(9), noting that such orders are not statutory rules (s 7(10)).
   • If no exemption applies, parliamentary approval by resolution of both Houses is required (s 7(2)). Prepare and lodge the draft resolution and be aware of how approval operates, including the 5 sitting days procedure under s 8.

4. If you are a licence or lease holder under the MRDA and the land’s use is changed under State law:

   • For licence holders: maintain contemporaneous records of the reasonable costs of exploration and the work conducted under the licence (s 9(1)). If the licence is revoked because the land’s use is changed, notify the Minister and make a reimbursement claim. The Act requires payment within three months and allows recovery as a debt if not paid (s 9(2)).
   • For leaseholders: document reasonable loss or reasonable damage resulting from any revocation and engage with the Minister. Attempt to negotiate compensation; if agreement cannot be reached, the Mining Tribunal will determine compensation (s 10(2)). Keep evidence to support claims under the “reasonable” standards in ss 9 and 10.

5. Respond to Ministerial proposals about severance or replacement tenure.

   • If the Minister proposes to grant a new lease or resurvey/define the remaining part of a tenement as an alternative under s 10(3), require that the Minister provides particulars as mandated by s 10(4). If dissatisfied, prepare a claim to the Mining Tribunal promptly as permitted by s 10(4)-(5).

6. Prepare for procedural timelines and forum selection.

   • For reimbursement under s 9(2) the three-month payment window is a hard timeframe after which the holder may sue for debt in any court of competent jurisdiction. Commence proceedings promptly if payment is not made.
   • For compensation under s 10 rely on the Mining Tribunal and Part 7 of the MRDA, so prepare to use MRDA procedures (s 11). Understand time limits and evidentiary rules in Part 7 of the MRDA.

7. Track administrative and legislative changes.

   • Monitor regulatory instruments and Governor’s Gazette notices for amendments to Schedule 3 (s 7(9)-(10)) and for any regulations made under s 12 that could change compliance obligations. Also check which Minister and Department administer the Act, as temporary administration is specified in s 13 until an Administrative Arrangements Act order is made.

8. Coordinate cross-Act compliance checks.

   • Check the Crown Lands Act 1976, Forest Management Act 2013, Nature Conservation Act 2002, National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002, Public Land (Administration and Forests) Act 1991, and the MRDA to ensure that any proposed action is consistent across regimes. For projects that straddle multiple statutes, ensure that approvals or processes under those Acts are completed and do not inadvertently trigger s 7(2).

9. Document positions, opinions and Ministerial communications.

   • The Director of Mines’ opinion under s 7(4), Ministerial proposals under s 10(3) and communications under s 10(4), and any referrals to the Tasmanian Planning Commission under s 7(6) are material decisions. Seek written confirmation of such decisions and preserve records to support judicial or tribunal review if needed.

10. Legal risk management.

    • For parties acquiring Crown land or investing in exploration/mining within SPZs, include contractual protections against revocation risk, clear allocation of who will pursue reimbursement/compensation claims, and express mechanisms for cost documentation. Because the Act makes reimbursement recoverable as a debt by the licence holder (s 9(2)) and compensation subject to the Mining Tribunal (s 10(2)), contract clauses should address recovery mechanisms, timelines and who funds tribunal proceedings.

Following these steps will put a land manager, developer, licence or lease holder in a position to determine whether proposed actions require parliamentary approval and to protect and pursue the statutory reimbursement and compensation rights the Act provides. Where doubt exists about instructions or administrative opinions (for example, the Director of Mines’ view under s 7(4)), seek declaratory or judicial review remedies in the appropriate forum, and preserve evidence to support claims under ss 9 and 10.